Monday, 29 January 2024

The Expansion of Consciousness

This is a phrase that has long been current in many esoteric and mystical circles as a description of the spiritual project. I've used it myself in the past because one normally expresses oneself in the language of the day but also because, let's be honest, I probably wasn't thinking too deeply about what it actually implies. 

So, what does it imply? To begin with, is expansion of consciousness necessarily a spiritual thing? One assumes so based on an evolutionary description of human unfoldment, and there is certainly the strong probability that the universe is, in one sense, a machine for the growth of consciousness. In that sense then it is spiritual. Human beings can grow out of their limited earthbound type of consciousness into higher states. But they can do this through drugs and there is nothing spiritual about drugs or the states they bestow. Drugs can give the impression of love, bliss, oneness and all that, as can some forms of mental illness, but this is not spiritual because it relates to effects not inner transformation. Meditation and other spiritual, so-called, techniques can also bring about heightened states of consciousness but the subject is not fundamentally changed by that. He may think he is and he may act in a particular way but deep inside he is not really changed at all for one may have many expansions of consciousness and still remain the same fallen, unredeemed human ego at core. This is true even if the expansionary experiences are, so to speak, not just extending the circumference of the circle but going from a circle to a sphere. In these cases the subject may act as though ego has been transcended but he is the same person, responding to his experience by imitating what he thinks is the type of being that would be stabilised in this experience. And note that these expansions of consciousness are all just temporary anyway.

That is why all proper spiritual teachers tell meditators not to imagine they can do without prayer. The old dream of fallen human nature is to think it can reach godhood without God. This is a wicked lie designed to appeal to the spiritually avaricious ego. It's what tempted Eve to bite the apple and it's what tempts many would-be mystics and esotericists today. Spirituality without God is not possible. That is the major drawback of Buddhism though God is often smuggled in through the back door in that religion.

On a simple linguistic level we can say that something that expands still has the same centre, and from the spiritual perspective it is the transformation of the centre that matters so the very concept of expanding consciousness is not spiritual. This doesn't mean that souls in heaven do not have a transfigured state of being but that is because they have taken on the mind of Christ and no spiritual practice can enable that. It depends of the soul giving itself to God through Christ and then becoming the recipient of grace. It may be argued that this is just a different way of expressing the same thing, expanding consciousness and taking on the mind of Christ is six of one and half a dozen of the other, but the way you express yourself matters because it both reflects and forms the way you think. If you think of the spiritual journey in terms of expanding consciousness you are thinking of it in terms of what the ego can gain and how it can grow. To reach a truly transfigured consciousness is only possible through taking on the mind of Christ and that can only happen through the soul loving Christ and asking nothing for itself other than to be allowed to do so.  Everything else is just to make the soul grow by applying growth stimulus from without. This alone grows the soul from within which is the only true way.

8 comments:

  1. @William - I personally can't make real sense out of the concept of Man being "fallen".

    I accept that the fall concept has a valid function in being an attempt to explain the fact that this mortal world, and mortal Men, always have some evil mixed with whatever good there may be.

    But I don't believe that Men ever were un-fallen. My understanding is that in Man's spiritual childhood his nature was of the same mixed nature as now; but as a less developed spirit, each Man was automatically obedient to God and therefore behaved with "perfect" goodness.

    (Also men lacked the self-consciousness to discern good and evil - and so just assumed everything was good - rather like a happy young child in a happy home. )

    But Man did not ever have a wholly good *will* at any time in the past - I think perfect goodness was only made possible by Jesus Christ, and after mortal death.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The fact we are fallen makes intuitive sense to me but it doesn't mean we were actively good in the past. We would have been natural, neither good nor evil like an animal. But there is a mystery here and the fallen concept is an attempt to explain why we are even worse than we would naturally be given the rise of self-consciousness, why the ego at our core is such a solid ball of mischief, to put it in the mildest of terms. It's all tied up with the mystery of evil and suffering in general, and the idea that something has gone wrong in our primeval past. The pain in the world and the corruption in our hearts need not have been what they are and it is these that made necessary the Incarnation of Christ. A non-fallen humanity would not have needed that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. @William - Ah, I see. As you know, for me the reason for the incarnation of Christ is that given in the IV Gospel - so that we can follow him to everlasting life in Heaven. And I see evil as intrinsically cumulative in this world as it necessarily is; partly because of "entropy", partly because demons accumulate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. I think Christ came to heal the damage of the fall and also to offer us eternal life. I agree with you that evil is cumulative, that's a good way of putting it. It does seem to build up almost as matter of course unless there is an injection from outside the system to put things right again. I do look forward to seeing things face to face instead of through a glass darkly!

    ReplyDelete
  5. So far I see the Fall is in essence the foiled or forestalled original design for many to be adopted-divinised children of God. I would add in Satan's eyes because I disagree with Dr. Charlton on time. I do think universe time is different from God's time, and I do think in Jesus the universe time and God's time are co-mingled/married/adopted so that Jesus is really the center of space-time and it is difficult to say if he really is not already incarnated at the time of the Fall. I think he is.

    The original design of adoption was thwarted and Jesus did provide the possibility of being adopted-divinised children of God.

    But I'm not sure if solving death and entropy are entirely the good news. It seems that the marriage of heaven and earth, of God and humanity is a standalone good news and offer in itself.

    So I'd agree that Jesus both healed the damage of the foiled original plan by restoring the marriage of heaven and earth (divinised sons) and offered eternal life for an entropic world.

    But I disagree with 'The pain in the world and the corruption in our hearts need not have been what they are and it is these that made necessary the Incarnation of Christ. A non-fallen humanity would not have needed that.'

    I think Jesus' incarnation was probably always going to happen, it's just the style of the incarnation and his life, death and resurrection were made necessary by the Fall and free choice of angels and men.

    All in all, I love the Fall. Its cosmic story of a spiritual war between God and angels and men frames my life by making sense of the destruction in it. We were born into a spiritual war with angels who wish to kill, steal and destroy.

    Thanks for the post.

    ReplyDelete
  6. In the Middle Ages they called the Fall a Felix Culpa or fortunate fault as it brought about the need for the Incarnation and so gave us the chance to know Christ in the flesh. But I agree that he may have been born in the world anyway though his suffering and crucifixion would not have been necessary as redemptive sacrifices.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @ William Wildblood

    RE "mystery of evil"

    There is no objective need (but heaps of popular subjective self-serving WANT) to use fabricated ABSTRACT OTHERWORLDLY notions such as “satan” or “the devil” or "lucifer" to explain evilness on earth. There is no mystery of evil. There's only a lack of knowledge, true understanding, and denial of reality.

    Evil on earth, which DOES exist abundantly, is explained coherently by EARTH-BOUND true reality, by GENUINELY acknowledging the 2 married pink elephants in the room... www.CovidTruthBeKnown.com (or https://www.rolf-hefti.com/covid-19-coronavirus.html) (again, there's no objective need, only subjective want, for OTHERwordly "mysterious" mythical concepts).

    Fantasies have only ever distracted GENUINE truth-seekers from the true evil and so "spiritual" ideologies and religions (fantasies) have been helping to MAINTAIN evil on earth for thousands of years... The cited article above explains how this has come about, and continues...

    Without the right understanding, and whole acknowledgment, of the true WHOLE problem and reality, no real constructive LASTING change is possible for humanity. And if you do NOT acknowledge and recognize the WHOLE truth YOU are helping to prevent this from happening..

    "Separate what you know from what you THINK you know." --- Unknown

    If you have been injected with Covid jabs/bioweapons and are concerned, then verify what batch number you were injected with at https://tinyurl.com/ytthwrwm

    ReplyDelete
  8. You seem very sure of yourself, Chaucime. However, the entire Christian tradition accepts the reality of spiritual evil and so do most if not all other religions. An objective appraisal also points to the fact that the evil in this world cannot just arise from mundane human egotism.

    ReplyDelete